JONATHAN MARKOFF
> Er...perhaps I'd better repeat my first quote:
>
> >(This is not so important for typical Egmont stories, since those
> >are essentially assembly-line products.)
>
> Note I said *typical* Egmont stories. This does not apply to the
> elite few which include Don Rosa, William Van Horn, John Lustig, and
> *someone* who wrote "A Mouse and his Dog" (D 95028), which is my
> FAVORITE non-Gottfredson Mickey story reprinted by Gladstone in
> their second run.
You don't get it, do you, Jonathan? Your so-called "elite" of Don Rosa,
William Van Horn, John Lustig, and whoever, *are* typical Egmont
writers, along with David Gerstein, Charlie Martin, Dave Rawson, Stefan
Petrucha, Pat McGreal, Paul Halas, Darko Macan, and many, many others.
They're *all* typical in that they approach each and every one of their
stories with exactly the same thought in mind -- to write the best story
they can possibly write. *You* may think some are more talented than the
others (I might even agree), but just where do you get off assuming that
the ones you don't like just hack it out? Have you spoken to them? Have
you watched them work? Have you been involved in countless story
conferences between them and their editors? No, you haven't--you know
*less* than nothing (the less because you're actually arrogant enough to
think you've got a clue).
> But I will not recant my belief that the normal Egmont stories are
> stamped off a die. The different artists--Vicar, Santanach, Millet,
> and about 450,000,000,000,000 others who go by one (often nearly
> unpronounceable) name only, draw ducks in the exact same style,
> exact same facial expressions as every other normal Egmont artist,
> and never with the looseness and bounciness of Van Horn or the
> lifelike images of Rosa.
Gee, the artists have Spanish names that li'l Johnny can't pronounce.
Let's take them right out and shoot them!
Again, you haven't got a clue. Every one of those artists' work is
instantly recognizable as *his* work--not *one* of them stamps it out
with a die or traces facial expressions. *You* may like Rosa or Van Horn
better than Vicar, and so what? Have you watched them draw? Have you
talked to them and listened to their concerns about doing the best job
possible, their desires to learn more and more about making good comics?
Nah--again, you just make it up off the top of your head.
> The staff of writers, with such names as Dave Angus, Tom Anderson,
> and Jack Sutter,
Geez, where's your much vaunted "historical context" now, Markoff? Dave
Angus hasn't worked for Egmont since the mid-'80s, Tom Anderson hasn't
worked for us for almost 4 years (Jack Sutter is still working for us,
and doing a great job, in my opinion). There are a *lot* of writers who
don't work for us anymore because I've fired them. I never knew Dave
Angus, for example, and I don't have a very good opinion of the quality
of his work, but how do *you* know he was a "factory worker". Did you
ever stop for even a second to think that maybe he tried his best, but
just wasn't very good?
> [The writers] are told, as David Gerstein explained earlier, to
> write their scripts in a minimal English vocabulary bordering on
> Orwell's Newspeak so it's not too complicated for editors in Russia
> and China to translate these stories. "Hey, Longfellow! Stop rhyming
> your poems in English 'cause they won't rhyme in Italian!" "Hey
> Dickens! Don't name you character "Scrooge" because we can't find
> that word in our dictionary!"
Oh, so now you're claiming that David Gerstein is helping you make up
your fantasies. Fantasies they are, Markoff there is not now nor has
there ever been in the five and a half years I've been here, such a
rule. But of course, you're still operating on your "elite" theory,
right? So it never occurs to you that if it's okay for Don Rosa to write
Longfellow dialogue, it's also okay for another of our "typical" writers
to do the same.
For everyone's information, the only dialogue "rule" we have (beyond
common sense guidelines like "the words shouldn't squeeze out the
pictures") is that any puns or wordplay should not influence the action.
My oft-repeated example: don't have a character misunderstand "lunch" as
"launch" and shoot a rocket into outer space. That's not only not
translatable, it makes the action in the story nonsensical in any
language except English. But a writer can write in rhyme--we consider it
a guide for the translator to make up his own rhymes.
> And they cannot make there stories past (gasp!) *8* pages without
> serializing them, because that is way too long! "Hey, Homer, you'll
> have to make that 'Iliad' serializable into at least 55 issues!"
Yet again, you speak without the slightest amount of knowledge. We
create *lots* of stories longer than 8 pages for our weekly and monthly
magazines. And of course, we do have continued stories, in 8-page
chapters just like "Walt Disney's Comics & Stories" in the '50s. And
since our weekly was designed to be the European equilvalent of WDC&S,
of course it doesn't contain novel-length stories on a regular basis.
And so what?
You seem to think that giving a writer or artist page limits is a crime
against art and reduces him to the status of a hack. Guess you don't
think much of Barks then, do you? For years, he produced a 10-page story
every month--*exactly* ten pages. There were even a few months during
the war when he had to cut back to 8-pagers, and he complied. And when
the post office required that there be a second story in Uncle Scrooge,
he produced 4-page Gyro stories. But according to your "reasoning", he
must be a hack just because each and every one of his stories was
crafted to fit the physical limits of the magazine.
> Futhermore, that computerized lettering ultimately obliterates even
> that forum for individuality, ending any chance of duplicating Walt
> Kelly's "characterized" speech for characters, i. e. having a
> certain character talk in Gothic type and another in circus poster
> letters. Thank your lucky stars that I've never seen the Egmont's
> coloring, so I can't criticize that.
I don't like computerized lettering either, but what's that got to do
with the price of eggs in China? Remember, your argument is that the
people who work for us are hacks, so I guess by mentioning the lettering
you're extending it to include your faves, who all produce work for a
company that uses computer lettering. And again you're calling Barks a
hack, because his stories were many times horribly colored and printed
on toilet paper.
> >xxxx YOU!
>
> The "CyberPatrol" program on my computer actually blocked out this
> one into x's when I first opened it. (For those of you who still
> have it blocked, Byron first wrote "F," then "U," then "C," then
>"K.") Hmmm....this word was also used by Pieter Van Cleef
> once...maybe just being a Disney comics editor impairs one's
> vocabulary like that.
Actually, I was really pleased with that part of my letter. The words I
chose precisely expressed both my opinion of your opinions, and my
anger. I gather you'd prefer an English gentlemen's club argument,
totally devoid of all emotion? If so, you've missed yet another one,
Markoff--to be *worth* printing in a comic book, a story must first and
foremost be emotional.
> P. S. Even before this, I already knew that if Gladstone or De
> Geillustreerde Pers was up for grabs, I would *not* submit mny
> stories to Egmont, so don't blame Byron for that (not that you'd
> really want them ;-).
And more power to you, if you can actually write something worth
reading. Careful, though -- there's probably a fanboy double of you out
there who will assume you're a worthless hack just because his copy of a
magazine was missing a staple.
-- Byron (he's still rude, crude, and lewd, but is trying to "think of
the children") Erickson
Author
Topic: 199611
(342 messages)
Byron Erickson
The Fanboy Speaks
Message 331 -
1996-11-29 at 18:27:46
Markoff
The Fanboy Speaks
Message 332 -
1996-11-29 at 22:29:53
>Gee, the artists have Spanish names that li'l Johnny can't pronounce.
>Let's take them right out and shoot them!
Huh? I know Spanish! Victor Arrigada Rios is VEEK-tor ar-ree-GAH-dah REE-os,
Daniel Branca is dahn-YEL BRANH-kah. But Millet, isn't that French and
pronounced mil-LAY? And what about Santanach? That "ach" at the end doesn't
sound like a Spanish name, it sounds like it should be German and pronounced
sahn-TAHN-ahk.
>>xxxx YOU!
>Actually, I was really pleased with that part of my letter. The words I
>chose precisely expressed both my opinion of your opinions, and my
>anger. I gather you'd prefer an English gentlemen's club argument,
>totally devoid of all emotion? If so, you've missed yet another one,
>Markoff--to be *worth* printing in a comic book, a story must first and
>foremost be emotional.
"Madam, I may be drunk, but you are ugly, and tomorrow, I will be sober."
>Let's take them right out and shoot them!
Huh? I know Spanish! Victor Arrigada Rios is VEEK-tor ar-ree-GAH-dah REE-os,
Daniel Branca is dahn-YEL BRANH-kah. But Millet, isn't that French and
pronounced mil-LAY? And what about Santanach? That "ach" at the end doesn't
sound like a Spanish name, it sounds like it should be German and pronounced
sahn-TAHN-ahk.
>>xxxx YOU!
>Actually, I was really pleased with that part of my letter. The words I
>chose precisely expressed both my opinion of your opinions, and my
>anger. I gather you'd prefer an English gentlemen's club argument,
>totally devoid of all emotion? If so, you've missed yet another one,
>Markoff--to be *worth* printing in a comic book, a story must first and
>foremost be emotional.
"Madam, I may be drunk, but you are ugly, and tomorrow, I will be sober."
Markoff
Treasure of Marco Polo
Message 333 -
1996-11-30 at 00:16:27
Having read "Treasure of Marco Polo" in Uncle $crooge Adventures 42, I can
now say that this is one of my two favorite later Barks stories, tied with
"North of the Yukon." I like it because it has a villain who is genuinely
malevolent, as opposed to Barks' usual comic villlains, who are too funny to
be scary. The Ducks' casual attitude during the hail of bullets in each
direction is one of Barks' better dramatic ironies. In fact, I probably like
it for the exact same reasons it was banned!
DANIEL VAN EIJMEREN:
Exactly which words were changed from the original?
ANDERS ENGWALL:
You once mentioned it had ethnic stereotypes. Has the art been censored as
well, then?
--Jonathan Markoff
now say that this is one of my two favorite later Barks stories, tied with
"North of the Yukon." I like it because it has a villain who is genuinely
malevolent, as opposed to Barks' usual comic villlains, who are too funny to
be scary. The Ducks' casual attitude during the hail of bullets in each
direction is one of Barks' better dramatic ironies. In fact, I probably like
it for the exact same reasons it was banned!
DANIEL VAN EIJMEREN:
Exactly which words were changed from the original?
ANDERS ENGWALL:
You once mentioned it had ethnic stereotypes. Has the art been censored as
well, then?
--Jonathan Markoff
Markoff
Truce
Message 334 -
1996-11-30 at 00:49:49
BYRON:
You're making a mountain out of a molehill. All I said in my original
message was:
"(This is not so important for typical Egmont stories, since those are
essentially assembly-line products.)"
That's all I said, buried in the middle of a larger paragraph. It was meant
as a passing satire, a sort of in-joke in the style of Dave Barry (e. g.,
"So many Japanese produccts are soldd in the USA that even our congressmen
and senators are probably Japanese products"), and I was really
half-thinking of this quote from Phil Payne in THE GLADSTONE GAZETTE 7,
regarding "The Snacking Sleuths" in Walt Disney Giant 5:
"I realize that puns and the sort are difficult to translate, but in the
case of masters like Scarpa, Milton, Rota, and now Cavazzano, it's worth the
extra effort!! I mean, is 'rescripting' a story really necessary? I can
understand this with the Gutenberghus shorts, which are a collaboration of
various talents, but not in the case of such truly fine works as those by
the aforementioned artists/writers."
I first heard of Byron Erickson 8 years ago, when I read some Danish stories
he had rescripted for Gladstone. At the time, I knew nothing about the
writers of these comics, so they just existed as names for me. They had a
special mystic-ness for me, especially the ones including Byron who had
vaguely intriguing names. Then in 1994, I was ecstatic when Gladstone
starting printing original Erickson stories! (And even Ferioli is a better
artist than the ones I call "typical" Egmont artists, although he's no Don
Rosa) It was a dream come true when Byron joined the mailing list, and even
this half-assed "nightmare" won't taint my memories.
Besides, there are worse comic stories out there than Egmont Duck stories.
"Casper the Friendly Ghost" is enough to make a typical Millet story look
like the "Life of Scrooge"!
So, peace, friend Byron?
BTW, that same GLADSTONE GAZETTE 7 mentioned above contains a letter from
someone named Jonathan Markoff, containing the quote:
"DONALD DUCK AND MICKEY MOUSE 5 was an excellent issue! "A Mouse ans His
Dog" by Erickson and Ferioli was the best original MM story since the MICKEY
MOUSE ADVENTURES comics of 1990-1991. It had an innovative plot formula,
excitement and humor, and a rare opportunity to see what personality Pluto
would have if he could talk. My only gripe is that the story was too short!
Please print some longer stories by this team, if any exist, to see how
their style lends itself to a longer story."
GLADSTONE:
Will you do any more of that?
--Jonathan "FOB=Friends of Byron" Markoff
You're making a mountain out of a molehill. All I said in my original
message was:
"(This is not so important for typical Egmont stories, since those are
essentially assembly-line products.)"
That's all I said, buried in the middle of a larger paragraph. It was meant
as a passing satire, a sort of in-joke in the style of Dave Barry (e. g.,
"So many Japanese produccts are soldd in the USA that even our congressmen
and senators are probably Japanese products"), and I was really
half-thinking of this quote from Phil Payne in THE GLADSTONE GAZETTE 7,
regarding "The Snacking Sleuths" in Walt Disney Giant 5:
"I realize that puns and the sort are difficult to translate, but in the
case of masters like Scarpa, Milton, Rota, and now Cavazzano, it's worth the
extra effort!! I mean, is 'rescripting' a story really necessary? I can
understand this with the Gutenberghus shorts, which are a collaboration of
various talents, but not in the case of such truly fine works as those by
the aforementioned artists/writers."
I first heard of Byron Erickson 8 years ago, when I read some Danish stories
he had rescripted for Gladstone. At the time, I knew nothing about the
writers of these comics, so they just existed as names for me. They had a
special mystic-ness for me, especially the ones including Byron who had
vaguely intriguing names. Then in 1994, I was ecstatic when Gladstone
starting printing original Erickson stories! (And even Ferioli is a better
artist than the ones I call "typical" Egmont artists, although he's no Don
Rosa) It was a dream come true when Byron joined the mailing list, and even
this half-assed "nightmare" won't taint my memories.
Besides, there are worse comic stories out there than Egmont Duck stories.
"Casper the Friendly Ghost" is enough to make a typical Millet story look
like the "Life of Scrooge"!
So, peace, friend Byron?
BTW, that same GLADSTONE GAZETTE 7 mentioned above contains a letter from
someone named Jonathan Markoff, containing the quote:
"DONALD DUCK AND MICKEY MOUSE 5 was an excellent issue! "A Mouse ans His
Dog" by Erickson and Ferioli was the best original MM story since the MICKEY
MOUSE ADVENTURES comics of 1990-1991. It had an innovative plot formula,
excitement and humor, and a rare opportunity to see what personality Pluto
would have if he could talk. My only gripe is that the story was too short!
Please print some longer stories by this team, if any exist, to see how
their style lends itself to a longer story."
GLADSTONE:
Will you do any more of that?
--Jonathan "FOB=Friends of Byron" Markoff
Marco Barlotti
"Special" colouring of D-coded stories
Message 335 -
1996-11-30 at 01:30:03
We have already discussed a few weeks ago the "special" colouring of some
Italian stories (notably, ALL stories -by Chierchini- with Little Gum; and
others too).
I was surprised to find a few D-coded and S-coded stories with the same kind
of colouring. For instance: D-8934 (in issue #1858 of "Topolino"); D-7966
(in issue #1887); D-9216 (in issue #1888); S-80216 (in issue #1892); D-8880
and D-7912 (in issue #1893 of "Topolino").For the first one, no credit is
given; for all of the others, the colours are credited to Leopoldo
Barbarini. Have these stories ever appeared in other countries with this
"special" colours?
Marco
Italian stories (notably, ALL stories -by Chierchini- with Little Gum; and
others too).
I was surprised to find a few D-coded and S-coded stories with the same kind
of colouring. For instance: D-8934 (in issue #1858 of "Topolino"); D-7966
(in issue #1887); D-9216 (in issue #1888); S-80216 (in issue #1892); D-8880
and D-7912 (in issue #1893 of "Topolino").For the first one, no credit is
given; for all of the others, the colours are credited to Leopoldo
Barbarini. Have these stories ever appeared in other countries with this
"special" colours?
Marco
Frank Stajano
Disney comics Digest V96 #258
Message 336 -
1996-11-30 at 03:17:41
HARALD:
>Maybe this is old news to all of you - but did you know there is a
>very nice story in one of the Italian digests, where a reporter
>visits *Carl Barks* and his wife Gare, and Carl tells the story of
>how he met $crooge and became his personal portraitist etc.?
>It's really nice, and well drawn too...
...and of course you can thank great master Cavazzano for the "well drawn".
I personally don't like that story particularly (it is nice as a "thank you
Barks", but doesn't stand on its own as a story), but the art is splendid.
I-1919 (I-1919-C, we might say... and sorry Harry and Marco for the long
absence from our db thinglets), "Zio Paperone e l'uomo dei paperi" (Uncle
Scrooge and the Duck Man), Rudy Salvagnini / Giorgio Cavazzano.
Today's ad: for more info on Cavazzano, remember to visit
http://www.orl.co.uk/~fms/disney/cavazzano/
Frank (filologo disneyano) http://www.orl.co.uk/~fms/
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V96 Issue #265
******************************************
>Maybe this is old news to all of you - but did you know there is a
>very nice story in one of the Italian digests, where a reporter
>visits *Carl Barks* and his wife Gare, and Carl tells the story of
>how he met $crooge and became his personal portraitist etc.?
>It's really nice, and well drawn too...
...and of course you can thank great master Cavazzano for the "well drawn".
I personally don't like that story particularly (it is nice as a "thank you
Barks", but doesn't stand on its own as a story), but the art is splendid.
I-1919 (I-1919-C, we might say... and sorry Harry and Marco for the long
absence from our db thinglets), "Zio Paperone e l'uomo dei paperi" (Uncle
Scrooge and the Duck Man), Rudy Salvagnini / Giorgio Cavazzano.
Today's ad: for more info on Cavazzano, remember to visit
http://www.orl.co.uk/~fms/disney/cavazzano/
Frank (filologo disneyano) http://www.orl.co.uk/~fms/
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V96 Issue #265
******************************************
Don Rosa
Disney comics Digest V96 #265
Message 337 -
1996-11-30 at 09:24:42
MIKE S.:
How did my original "Pertwillaby Papers" version of "The Once and Future
Duck" end? Or intend to end? Completely different! The old idea was
structured around the notion that time-travel was a comic-book idea that had
no basis in reality, but it seemed to happen in the story to the dismay of
my heroes, marooning them in the past with no idea of how to return to any
particular other time. The end of that version was to have King Arthur ready
to burn everyone at the stake and announce the date, which would
surprisingly be the current year of the present; this would make my heroes
realize that they had not time-traveled but had been knocked into one of
those "alternate dimensions" by a power surge in Stonehenge, something they
could duplicate to send themselves back. In the dimension they were in, the
Dark Ages had lasted much longer and "delayed" history.
There were several reasons I couldn't use this ending in a Duck comic.
First, the whole mess is far too SF-ey for Duck stuff, and even the part of
the story I did use don't set well in my mind. Next, the main intention
behind the story was to depict the historic "King Arthur"... and if I'm
saying that this was not true history, then that wrecks my intention of
saying "this is how it REALLY was". But my main reason I didn't end the Duck
version the same way was that I did not know how they would find out they
were still in the current year since that would entail someone NAMING that
year... and since I see my stories taking place in the 50s, that would make
that part of the new story rather confusing. I couldn't allow my Ducks to
say "It's 1996"... and I knew no editor would allow them to say "It's 1954".
Someone here suggested other ways to accomplish that, but it's a moot point now.
Anyway, your other guess was precisely right. In part 3 of the original
Professor Smyte made a suit of Black Armor using the Omnisolve(tm) which
would make him indestructible. And I actually completed the next chapter
showing this, but it was never printed anywhere... it's still in a drawer in
my comic vault. But I will use this in a $crooge story as a sequel to my
"Universal Solvent" story sometime.
But... where did you find parts 1 & 2 of that old "Knighttime" story?
How did my original "Pertwillaby Papers" version of "The Once and Future
Duck" end? Or intend to end? Completely different! The old idea was
structured around the notion that time-travel was a comic-book idea that had
no basis in reality, but it seemed to happen in the story to the dismay of
my heroes, marooning them in the past with no idea of how to return to any
particular other time. The end of that version was to have King Arthur ready
to burn everyone at the stake and announce the date, which would
surprisingly be the current year of the present; this would make my heroes
realize that they had not time-traveled but had been knocked into one of
those "alternate dimensions" by a power surge in Stonehenge, something they
could duplicate to send themselves back. In the dimension they were in, the
Dark Ages had lasted much longer and "delayed" history.
There were several reasons I couldn't use this ending in a Duck comic.
First, the whole mess is far too SF-ey for Duck stuff, and even the part of
the story I did use don't set well in my mind. Next, the main intention
behind the story was to depict the historic "King Arthur"... and if I'm
saying that this was not true history, then that wrecks my intention of
saying "this is how it REALLY was". But my main reason I didn't end the Duck
version the same way was that I did not know how they would find out they
were still in the current year since that would entail someone NAMING that
year... and since I see my stories taking place in the 50s, that would make
that part of the new story rather confusing. I couldn't allow my Ducks to
say "It's 1996"... and I knew no editor would allow them to say "It's 1954".
Someone here suggested other ways to accomplish that, but it's a moot point now.
Anyway, your other guess was precisely right. In part 3 of the original
Professor Smyte made a suit of Black Armor using the Omnisolve(tm) which
would make him indestructible. And I actually completed the next chapter
showing this, but it was never printed anywhere... it's still in a drawer in
my comic vault. But I will use this in a $crooge story as a sequel to my
"Universal Solvent" story sometime.
But... where did you find parts 1 & 2 of that old "Knighttime" story?
Harry Fluks
Volume96/262 - Dave, David, Steve, Arthur
Message 338 -
1996-11-30 at 11:17:28
DAVE RAWSON:
PS> it might be beneficial if you could save typing by explicitly saying
PS> that Li'l Wolf *isn't* in one particular Big Bad Wolf story, but not
PS> having to say that he does appear in all the rest; and when an index
PS> file intended to look at is produced, there shouldn't be lots of
PS> "uninteresting" appearances listed there.
> Sounds like you folks might be headed toward a relational database?
I already consider the database to be "relational" (though it doesn't make
use of any commercial "relational database" program). But I have no idea why
you draw your conclusion from Per's words.
DAVID:
> "Land of the Totem Poles" and "Island in the Sky" were censored
> when they were reprinted in newsstand comics, NOT albums.
Aaaagh! I made the same mistake *again*! I hope I'll remember it
*this* time...
STEVE:
[About Barks "Hammocks" cover, inked by Ulrich Schroeder]
Steve> But this wasn't done for a cover, right? It was a sketch for a fan?
Harry> How do you know?
Steve> I don't, that's why the question marks at the end of the sentace,
Steve> asking if this is so. So you say it wasn't?
Your sentence looked more definite ("It was..." in stead of "Was it...")
so I thought you knew more about this. *I* don't: all I know is what I've
already mentioned on the List.
Anyone else, maybe?
ARTHUR:
> I always think that the Dutch are very original and very good with their
> translations. The Rosa-stories are usually VERY good translated
Have you seen the most recent Dutch DD Extra? It prints Don's "Last sled
to Dawson". It was very well translated (especially the Robert W. Service
poem)! And it also got a very good colouring!
It seems they plan to publish this story in a Scrooge album, as part of
the "Life of Scrooge" series.
--Harry.
PS> it might be beneficial if you could save typing by explicitly saying
PS> that Li'l Wolf *isn't* in one particular Big Bad Wolf story, but not
PS> having to say that he does appear in all the rest; and when an index
PS> file intended to look at is produced, there shouldn't be lots of
PS> "uninteresting" appearances listed there.
> Sounds like you folks might be headed toward a relational database?
I already consider the database to be "relational" (though it doesn't make
use of any commercial "relational database" program). But I have no idea why
you draw your conclusion from Per's words.
DAVID:
> "Land of the Totem Poles" and "Island in the Sky" were censored
> when they were reprinted in newsstand comics, NOT albums.
Aaaagh! I made the same mistake *again*! I hope I'll remember it
*this* time...
STEVE:
[About Barks "Hammocks" cover, inked by Ulrich Schroeder]
Steve> But this wasn't done for a cover, right? It was a sketch for a fan?
Harry> How do you know?
Steve> I don't, that's why the question marks at the end of the sentace,
Steve> asking if this is so. So you say it wasn't?
Your sentence looked more definite ("It was..." in stead of "Was it...")
so I thought you knew more about this. *I* don't: all I know is what I've
already mentioned on the List.
Anyone else, maybe?
ARTHUR:
> I always think that the Dutch are very original and very good with their
> translations. The Rosa-stories are usually VERY good translated
Have you seen the most recent Dutch DD Extra? It prints Don's "Last sled
to Dawson". It was very well translated (especially the Robert W. Service
poem)! And it also got a very good colouring!
It seems they plan to publish this story in a Scrooge album, as part of
the "Life of Scrooge" series.
--Harry.
Daniel Van Eijmeren
E.G. Mont stories
Message 339 -
1996-11-30 at 14:53:34
MIKKO AITTOLA wrote:
> I think the "problem" with Egmont disney-comics is that there is so
> much material coming out - each week. There's no chance in the world
> that one reader could like everything.
> [...]
> There are many good storytellers (Rosa, WVH) but also many really bad
> ones. I'd say that most of the problem is with the writing department,
> BUT BECAUSE THERE'S NO CREDITS PRINTED on the pages, it's really
> difficult for readers to say who are the writers they don't like. That's
> also the reason the whole Egmont producing system LOOKS like an assembly
> line to "outsiders".
Very good point! I feel more or less obliged to comment on the matter
because I'm also one of the people who, untill very recently, thought
that Egmont was more or less an 'assembly line' with a few exceptions.
So I could have got the same reply as Jonathan.
The way I always talked about stories was: "That's a Barks, that's a
Rosa, that's a Jippes and that's an *Egmont*." There have been a lot of
'Egmont stories' which I like, but still they are a big grey mass because
I don't know who did what on which story. I would have had a lot more
interest in Egmont stories if I knew who the people behind them are.
Sometimes I'm bothering my friends with talking about my interest in
Disney Comics. On one Saturday evening I was talking with friends Lars
and Martijn about Carl Barks and my favourite stories by him. They also
started talking about their favourite ones (remember that Disney comics
are popular in Holland, so a lot of people know at least some stories).
Some of their favourite ones were by Barks, but to my surprise they were
also fond of an equal amount of Egmont stories.
They don't know anything about the writers and artists of Disney stories
(and they don't care), but an advantage of this is that they can give a
neutral and unprejucided judgement since for them the Barks/Rosa/etc
stories also belong to 'the big grey mass'.
When you become a Disney comic fan (at least it's the case with me), you
learn from some of the artist their names and their works. This gives a
more 'personal' view on them and so it can very well be that I like an
average Barks-story more than a good Egmont one, if you what I mean.
I just can't tell the Egmont stories apart from each other, which gives
them a quite impersonal look to me. (There are for example some Egmont
stories from a certain artist which I like a lot, but I just don't know
his name and so I can't say I want more Xxxx stories).
I'm lucky to be a fan of Disney comics who has a subscribtion to this
list and now I can get my hands on a lot of Egmont names because of the
Database and because some of the Egmont people are subscribed.
And now I even got a better look on Egmont because of Byron's recent
letters. Yes, of course the Egmont stories are made by *people* and of
course the Egmont company is no factory but a place where a lot of
creativeness comes together.
For this reason I'm very glad with Byron's letters, because it gave me a
more personal view on the Egmont stories and it will make it a lot more
fun to read one next time. It will make me a lot more curious to look up
an artist's name in the Database next time.
I understand Byron being so angry, but I really hope that his angerness
towards Jonathan will go by. Jonathan wrote about Egmont as if it is a
factory, which expressed the opinion of a lot of other people (including
mine!). Byron now made clear that such a generalizing opinion is not right
and also not fair. So I hope that this will be the end of the matter,
at least of all the angerness.
BYRON ERICKSON wrote:
> Every one of those artists' work is instantly recognizable as *his*
> work--not *one* of them stamps it out with a die or traces facial
> expressions.
You're right. The only stamp is the finishing touch: The signature...
Greetings,
--- Walt Disney Produc... er... Daniel
"Hooray! I'm cured! My mind doesn't hurt anymore!"
The Mad Musician, OG 11 --- Carl Barks
> I think the "problem" with Egmont disney-comics is that there is so
> much material coming out - each week. There's no chance in the world
> that one reader could like everything.
> [...]
> There are many good storytellers (Rosa, WVH) but also many really bad
> ones. I'd say that most of the problem is with the writing department,
> BUT BECAUSE THERE'S NO CREDITS PRINTED on the pages, it's really
> difficult for readers to say who are the writers they don't like. That's
> also the reason the whole Egmont producing system LOOKS like an assembly
> line to "outsiders".
Very good point! I feel more or less obliged to comment on the matter
because I'm also one of the people who, untill very recently, thought
that Egmont was more or less an 'assembly line' with a few exceptions.
So I could have got the same reply as Jonathan.
The way I always talked about stories was: "That's a Barks, that's a
Rosa, that's a Jippes and that's an *Egmont*." There have been a lot of
'Egmont stories' which I like, but still they are a big grey mass because
I don't know who did what on which story. I would have had a lot more
interest in Egmont stories if I knew who the people behind them are.
Sometimes I'm bothering my friends with talking about my interest in
Disney Comics. On one Saturday evening I was talking with friends Lars
and Martijn about Carl Barks and my favourite stories by him. They also
started talking about their favourite ones (remember that Disney comics
are popular in Holland, so a lot of people know at least some stories).
Some of their favourite ones were by Barks, but to my surprise they were
also fond of an equal amount of Egmont stories.
They don't know anything about the writers and artists of Disney stories
(and they don't care), but an advantage of this is that they can give a
neutral and unprejucided judgement since for them the Barks/Rosa/etc
stories also belong to 'the big grey mass'.
When you become a Disney comic fan (at least it's the case with me), you
learn from some of the artist their names and their works. This gives a
more 'personal' view on them and so it can very well be that I like an
average Barks-story more than a good Egmont one, if you what I mean.
I just can't tell the Egmont stories apart from each other, which gives
them a quite impersonal look to me. (There are for example some Egmont
stories from a certain artist which I like a lot, but I just don't know
his name and so I can't say I want more Xxxx stories).
I'm lucky to be a fan of Disney comics who has a subscribtion to this
list and now I can get my hands on a lot of Egmont names because of the
Database and because some of the Egmont people are subscribed.
And now I even got a better look on Egmont because of Byron's recent
letters. Yes, of course the Egmont stories are made by *people* and of
course the Egmont company is no factory but a place where a lot of
creativeness comes together.
For this reason I'm very glad with Byron's letters, because it gave me a
more personal view on the Egmont stories and it will make it a lot more
fun to read one next time. It will make me a lot more curious to look up
an artist's name in the Database next time.
I understand Byron being so angry, but I really hope that his angerness
towards Jonathan will go by. Jonathan wrote about Egmont as if it is a
factory, which expressed the opinion of a lot of other people (including
mine!). Byron now made clear that such a generalizing opinion is not right
and also not fair. So I hope that this will be the end of the matter,
at least of all the angerness.
BYRON ERICKSON wrote:
> Every one of those artists' work is instantly recognizable as *his*
> work--not *one* of them stamps it out with a die or traces facial
> expressions.
You're right. The only stamp is the finishing touch: The signature...
Greetings,
--- Walt Disney Produc... er... Daniel
"Hooray! I'm cured! My mind doesn't hurt anymore!"
The Mad Musician, OG 11 --- Carl Barks
Byron Erickson
I'll shut up now
Message 340 -
1996-11-30 at 17:23:57
>Sigh!< Now that my black heart is beating at a more-normal rate, it occurs to me that I should apologize to the readers of this mailing list who were offended by certain of my >a-hem!< "imperative-tense" sentences. Sorry, folks--I tend to get overly emotional when defending the integrity of the people who actually *create* the stuff this list was formed to discuss.
And Jonathan, if you want a truce, you've got it. But please remember
that I work 70-80-hour weeks, not because I get paid overtime (I don't),
but because I *care* about making good Disney comics. In that context, I
interpreted an "off-the-cuff" insult as being far worse than a frontal
assault, because it indicates that what we at EPS do is not even worthy
of thought.
I just hope that the result of my tirade won't be that the contributors
to this list will think twice about criticizing EPS *stories*. Feel
free, folks--the more criticism (both good and bad), the better. I
firmly believe that no one has to apologize (in either sense of the
word) for their opinions on a story they've actually read. Even if you
*hate* one of our stories, I won't yell at you (I may >gasp!< agree with
you, but if I *do* disagree, it won't hurt, I promise).
But please steer clear of personal attacks on comic creators while I'm
around. Don't forget that, even though I've been living in "civilized"
Europe for over five years now, I'm still a "vulgar" American. If you
wonder what that means to me, just consider that when our founding
fathers came up with the slogan "Don't Tread On Me!", it was an "or
else" that was left unsaid, not a polite "please".
--Byron "making mountains out of molehills since 1951" Erickson
And Jonathan, if you want a truce, you've got it. But please remember
that I work 70-80-hour weeks, not because I get paid overtime (I don't),
but because I *care* about making good Disney comics. In that context, I
interpreted an "off-the-cuff" insult as being far worse than a frontal
assault, because it indicates that what we at EPS do is not even worthy
of thought.
I just hope that the result of my tirade won't be that the contributors
to this list will think twice about criticizing EPS *stories*. Feel
free, folks--the more criticism (both good and bad), the better. I
firmly believe that no one has to apologize (in either sense of the
word) for their opinions on a story they've actually read. Even if you
*hate* one of our stories, I won't yell at you (I may >gasp!< agree with
you, but if I *do* disagree, it won't hurt, I promise).
But please steer clear of personal attacks on comic creators while I'm
around. Don't forget that, even though I've been living in "civilized"
Europe for over five years now, I'm still a "vulgar" American. If you
wonder what that means to me, just consider that when our founding
fathers came up with the slogan "Don't Tread On Me!", it was an "or
else" that was left unsaid, not a polite "please".
--Byron "making mountains out of molehills since 1951" Erickson
RPotter96
UNSUBCRIBE
Message 341 -
1996-11-30 at 17:29:02
UNSUBCRIBE
Arthur De Wolf
Some comments
Message 342 -
1996-11-30 at 21:16:18
Hi!
HARRY FLUKS:
> Have you seen the most recent Dutch DD Extra?
> It also got a very good colouring!
Oh, yeah! The coloring of "Last Sled to Dawson" is just GREAT! I've heard
that GP did a lot of trouble in coloring this story. They had it done in
France. The result is really beautiful. This is the very first time that
"LStD" was printed in Holland. And you're right; I really hope that they
will print this story in an album. The colors will look even better on
album-paper! Well done, GP!
DON ROSA:
> Did the lines look fuzzy to you?
Yes! Absolutely! I couldn't even distinguish one nephew from the other!
Naahh .. ofcourse the cover didn't look fuzzy to me! It's really insane to
think the cover didn't look right because the lines were fuzzy!
ALL:
The cover is on my website, by the way (in the picture gallery). So
for everyone who wants to see what the door-knob looked like, that Rosa
drew as a gift from Scrooge to Duey, take a look at it!
I was thinking about something, by the way. I noticed that when
all three nephews are on a cover, they're almost always colored as
red, blue, green (from left to right). Is that a coincidence, or is it some
kind of unofficial rule?
Arthur de Wolf -- Roosendaal, the Netherlands
email: (Email removed)
homepage: www.pi.net/~wolfman
"Don't you get it Mulder? Santa Claus doesn't exist!"
"Scully ... that's what they WANT us to believe."
HARRY FLUKS:
> Have you seen the most recent Dutch DD Extra?
> It also got a very good colouring!
Oh, yeah! The coloring of "Last Sled to Dawson" is just GREAT! I've heard
that GP did a lot of trouble in coloring this story. They had it done in
France. The result is really beautiful. This is the very first time that
"LStD" was printed in Holland. And you're right; I really hope that they
will print this story in an album. The colors will look even better on
album-paper! Well done, GP!
DON ROSA:
> Did the lines look fuzzy to you?
Yes! Absolutely! I couldn't even distinguish one nephew from the other!
Naahh .. ofcourse the cover didn't look fuzzy to me! It's really insane to
think the cover didn't look right because the lines were fuzzy!
ALL:
The cover is on my website, by the way (in the picture gallery). So
for everyone who wants to see what the door-knob looked like, that Rosa
drew as a gift from Scrooge to Duey, take a look at it!
I was thinking about something, by the way. I noticed that when
all three nephews are on a cover, they're almost always colored as
red, blue, green (from left to right). Is that a coincidence, or is it some
kind of unofficial rule?
Arthur de Wolf -- Roosendaal, the Netherlands
email: (Email removed)
homepage: www.pi.net/~wolfman
"Don't you get it Mulder? Santa Claus doesn't exist!"
"Scully ... that's what they WANT us to believe."